DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TJR
Docket No: 6929-13
31 July 2014
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552,
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 29 July 2014. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your
allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance
with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of your application, together with all
material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board:-found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 31
August 1973. You served for about 10 months without disciplinary
incident, but during the period from 19 June to 16 October 1974,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for
two periods of unauthorized-absence (UA) totalling 26 days,
missing muster, disrespect, disobedience, making false official
statements, breaking restriction, and absence from your appointed
place of duty.
Subsequently, in November 1974, you were administratively
processed for separation by reason of unfitness due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
After waiving your procedural rights, your commanding officer
recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of
unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with military authorities. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of
unfitness, and on 12 December 1974, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion of not having
problems and not committing misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your general discharge because of the
seriousness of your repeated misconduct which resulted in four
NUPs. The Board noted that you were given an opportunity to
fend your actions, but waived your procedural rights. Further,
ailors with a record of misconduct, such as yours, would
normally receive a discharge under other than honorable
conditions, and as such, the Board concluded that you were
fortunate to-have received a general discharge. Finally, there
is evidence in the record that is contrary to your assertion of
not having problems and not committing misconduct. Accordingly,
your application has been denied.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
ne
eens
ROBERT D. * fo — SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13341-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00558-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. However, you subsequently waived your right to present your case to an ADB in exchange for a recommendation for a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03189-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09388-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03286-05
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, advisory opinion, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08013-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08848-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01172-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 23 May 1972 at age 18. On 19 September 1973 you were again...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07995-03
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injusticeYou enlisted in the Marine Corps on January 1971 at age 17 During the period from 1 April to 29 October...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00493-01
On 5 November 1974 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 22 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a $200 forfeiture of pay. Subsequently, the discharge authority directed an 4 other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 27 The February 1975 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. and your contentions that you could use of alcohol and drugs, and The Board further considered your The Board...